Re: Re: Very Unusual Commercial Airing Currently on WBZ-AM

[Dave Faneuf <tklaundry@juno.com>]

On Sun, 23 Jun 2002 15:20:23 -0700 (PDT) Dan Billings
<billingsdan@yahoo.com> writes:
 
> 1.  I would not have made the same decision that WBZ
> made on local races, but I understand it.  I think the
> law requiring lowest unit rates for political ads
> should be repealed.  It amounts to subsidizing
> politicians.  Why should stations have to bump better
> paying clients to run political ads?  

Because the airwaves ALLEGEDLY belong to the public as a matter of fact
there is legislation being considered on Capitol Hill that would REQUIRE
Radio and TV stations to broadcast policitical ads for free and require
that during election season each radio and tv station devote 2 hours of
air time per week to coverage.   Why they are the lowest rates on the
cards?  Because it's politicians that make the laws so they are going to
give themselves a break at every opportunity.   The only races stations
are currently forced to accept advertising for are Federal races.

>I know the argument about public service but there are better
> ways to meet that requirement than 30 second ads.

I was at SFR at the time, mgmt maintained the Boston City Council race
was being handled in the news, funny, I didn't see many Boston City
Council stories during my time there, before, during or after the race.
 
> 2.  I agree that WBZ is making money from their
> decision but there are other stations that have
> policies that amount to management trying to act as a
> truth squad before accepting such ads.  I find such
> policies troubling.

I actually agree with what we used to call Standards and Practices. 
Eliminated much of the blatant untruthful advertising from the airwaves,
at least on WODS before Westinghouse eliminated the entire department. 
More than once Standards and Practices refused to allow an ad on the air
because it was misleading or untrue.
 
> 3.  Most of the spots we are talking about would not
> qualfify as PSAs -- if the station ran such things.

Probably right The MBTA's Ride certainly wouldn't qualify for a PSA.  I
remember working for a number of stations pre-deregulation that refused
to run PSA's for the military.  It had nothing to do with dove vs hawk,
it had everything to do with the military paying for air time on some
stations and asking the rest to do it for free.   Most stations don't run
PSA's  anymore because they don't have to.

df